Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37325289›Full record

ReviewTherapeutic advances in urology

New multiport robotic surgical systems: a comprehensive literature review of clinical outcomes in urology.

Morgan Salkowski, Enrico Checcucci, Alexander K Chow, Craig C Rogers, Firas Adbollah, Evangelos Liatsikos, Prokar Dasgupta, Gustavo C Guimaraes, Jens Rassweiler, Alexander Mottrie and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Therapeutic advances in urology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 36 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
36citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

36 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Systematic Review and Clinical Outcomes of new Robotic Systems in Urology.International braz j urol : official journal of the Brazilian Society of Urology
    Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Review
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Observational
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Robotic-assisted partial nephrectomy using the HugoCanadian Urological Association journal = Journal de l'Association des urologues du Canada · 2025
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

15 authors.

Morgan SalkowskiDepartment of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Enrico CheccucciDepartment of Surgery, Candiolo Cancer Institute, FPO-IRCCS, Turin, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7901-5608
Alexander K ChowDepartment of Urology, Rush University, Chicago, IL, USA.
Craig C RogersDepartment of Urology, VCORE-Vattikuti Urology Institute Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Firas AdbollahDepartment of Urology, VCORE-Vattikuti Urology Institute Center for Outcomes Research, Analytics and Evaluation, Henry Ford Hospital, Detroit, MI, USA.
Evangelos LiatsikosDepartment of Urology, University General Hospital of Patras, Patras, Greece.
Prokar DasguptaKing's Health Partners Academic Surgery, King's College London, London, UK.
Gustavo C GuimaraesBP-A Beneficência Portuguesa de São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.
Jens RassweilerDepartment of Urology and Andrology, Danube Private University, Krems, Austria.
Alexander MottrieORSI Academy, Ghent, Belgium.
Alberto BredaDepartment of Urology, Fundació Puigvert, Autonomous University of Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
Simone CrivellaroDepartment of Urology, University of Illinois Chicago, Chicago, IL, USA.
Jihad KaoukGlickman Urological and Kidney Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA.
Francesco PorpigliaDivision of Urology, Department of Oncology and San Luigi Gonzaga Hospital, University of Turin, Torino, Italy.
Riccardo AutorinoProfessor of Urology and Director of Surgical Innovation and Clinical Research, Department of Urology, Rush University Medical Center, Rush University, 1725 W. Harrison St., Professional Building-Suite 970, Chicago, IL 60612, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7045-7725

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Over the past 20 years, the field of robotic surgery has largely been dominated by the da Vinci robotic platform. Nevertheless, numerous novel multiport robotic surgical systems have been developed over the past decade, and some have recently been introduced into clinical practice. This nonsystematic review aims to describe novel surgical robotic systems, their individual designs, and their reported uses and clinical outcomes within the field of urologic surgery. Specifically, we performed a comprehensive review of the literature regarding the use of the Senhance robotic system, the CMR-Versius robotic system, and the Hugo RAS in urologic procedures. Systems with fewer published uses are also described, including the Avatera, Hintori, and Dexter. Notable features of each system are compared, with a particular emphasis on factors differentiating each system from the da Vinci robotic system.

Indexed as

AvateraHinotoriHugonew robotic systemsRevo-iSenhanceurologyVersius

Identifiers

PMID37325289
PMCPMC10265325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.